"The smug, high-end Washington press corps" are just another sub-group of the elites

i posted a while back on the ethics of ken silverstein's undercover gig to gather information about washington lobbying and public relations firms that appeared in the recent harper's... i opined at the time that it would be completely impossible for silverstein to have gotten the information he was able to obtain by any other means... here silverstein addresses the ethics issue, shares an identical opinion, and offers a few observations on the current state of our esteemed media...

Today ... it's almost impossible to imagine a mainstream media outlet undertaking a major undercover investigation.

[...]

The decline of undercover reporting — and of investigative reporting in general — also reflects, in part, the increasing conservatism and cautiousness of the media, especially the smug, high-end Washington press corps. As reporters have grown more socially prominent during the last several decades, they've become part of the very power structure that they're supposed to be tracking and scrutinizing.

[...]

Yes, undercover reporting should be used sparingly, and there are legitimate arguments to be had about when it is fair or appropriate. But I'm confident my use of it in this case was legitimate. There was a significant public interest involved, particularly given Congress' as-yet-unfulfilled promise to crack down on lobbyists in the aftermath of the Jack Abramoff scandal.

Could I have extracted the same information and insight with more conventional journalistic methods? Impossible.

Based on the number of interview requests I've had, and the steady stream of positive e-mails I've received, I'd wager that the general public is decidedly more supportive of undercover reporting than the Washington media establishment. One person who heard me talking about the story in a TV interview wrote to urge that I never apologize for "misrepresenting yourself to a pack of thugs … especially when misrepresentation is their own stock in trade!"

i, for one, am grateful that someone like silverstein is on the job...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

George actually BELIEVES he's the president

john dean...

Those with whom I have spoken have serious doubt that Bush and the White House staff really knows what Cheney is doing, why he is doing it, or how he is doing it. From the outset of this administration, Cheney has been instrumental in placing people loyal to him throughout the Executive Branch. This is not to say that Bush in not "the decider," for he is, but by shaping the debate and controlling the paper flow, Cheney decides what the decider will decide.

It has long been apparent that Cheney's genius is that he lets George W. Bush get out of bed every morning actually believing he is the President. In fact, his presidency is run by the President of the Senate, for Cheney is its true center of gravity. That fact has become more apparent with every passing year of this presidency, and anyone who thinks otherwise has truly "misunderestimated" our nominal president and his vice president.

it's a goddam, rotten shame that it's taken 6 1/2 years for what many of us have long suspected to begin to be exposed to the light of day...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Moyers on Murdoch: "...the predator of the hour"

bill moyers is turning shrill, not that that's a bad thing...

When it comes to money and power he’s carnivorous: all appetite and no taste. He’ll eat anything in his path. Politicians become little clay pigeons to be picked off with flattering headlines, generous air time, a book contract or the old-fashioned black jack that never misses: campaign cash. He hires lobbyists the way Imelda Marcos bought shoes, and stacks them in his cavernous closet, along with his conscience...

[...]

You will not be surprised to learn that Murdoch’s company paid little or no federal income tax over the past four years. His powerful portfolio positions him to claim a big stake in Yahoo and his takeover of The Wall Street Journal, now owned by the Bancroft family, which, like Adam and Eve, the parents of us all, are tempted to sell their birthright for a wormy apple.

Murdoch and THE JOURNAL’s editorial page are made for each other. They’ve both pursued the right's corporate and political agenda of the past quarter century. Both venerate what THE JOURNAL editorials call the “animal spirits” of business. But THE JOURNAL’s newsroom is another matter – there facts are sacred and independence revered. Rupert Murdoch has told the Bancrofts he’ll not meddle with the reporting. But he’s accustomed to using journalism as a personal spittoon.

[...]

His worst offense with FOX News is not even its baldly partisan agenda. Far worse is the travesty he’s made of its journalism. FOX News huffs and puffs, pontificates and proclaims, but does little serious original reporting. His tabloids sell babes and breasts, gossip and celebrities.

[...]

His pursuit of The Wall Street Journal is the latest in a cascading series of mergers, buy-outs, and other financial legerdemain that are making a shipwreck of journalism. Public minded newspapers are being dumped by their owners for wads of cash or crippled by cost cutting while their broadcasting cousins race to the bottom. Murdoch is just the predator of the hour. [...] Instead of checking the excesses of private and public power, these 21st century barons of the First Amendment revel in them; the public be damned.

the only truth moyers neglects to mention is that people like murdoch would sell their own grandmothers for a mess of pottage...

The phrase mess of pottage means something of little value. It is associated with the exchange by Esau of his birthright for a meal of lentil stew, as described in Genesis 25:29-34 in the Bible. (A pottage is a type of soup.)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

More of that annoying history, Past war surges(escalations).

Courtesy of Zfacts.
Oh how annoying history can be at times. Especially when you are trying to send thousands of American patriots to their deaths while killing hundreds of thousands of foreign patriots.
This one is dedicated to the Veterans of a war past, like Prof Marcus.
I have posted this in its entirety because it's important.

Vietnam war: surge to disaster
Did America cut and run from Vietnam?
Did the Democrats lose the war?

The US dropped more than four times the tonnage of bombs trying to win Vietnam as the allies used to flatten Germany in World War II. At a minimum, over 2 million people were killed including 58,000 Americans. Two and a half million Americans served in Vietnam. This was not cut-and-run, it was digging deeper when in a hole.

Anti-war protests? The most effective anti-war protests were by the US troops who "fragged" (threw fragmentation grenades at) 788 officers. Eighty six officers were killed by their own troops and 714 wounded. This had more impact than the kids with placards. You can't fight a war that the troops are sick of after ten years without progress.

I have a lot of trouble with this. I wasn't there, so it's hard for me to forward an opinion. Maybe some of you who read this can help me out. Is this true? Is this what will become of our troops as the war in Iraq drags on? As if we haven't done enough to them, must we push them to this? Could there be any worse fate, our kids turning on each other because of failed political agendas?

Did South East Asia go communist and threaten the US? That was predicted. The countries we bombed did go communist, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, but they were no threat. The important ones, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, did not. Most importantly, 30 years later, this is the result of losing the Vietnam war:

Mr. President, and Madam Chi, the reason I'm smiling is because I'm really happy to be here. And so is Laura. ... Vietnam is a remarkable country. For decades you had been torn apart by war. Today the Vietnamese people are at peace and seeing the benefits of reform. The Vietnamese own their own businesses, and today the Vietnamese economy is the fastest growing in Southeast Asia.
—George Bush, WhiteHouse.com(emphasis added)

To prevent this outcome, pro-war extremists think we should have killed more millions and sacrificed more American kids.

But weren't there bloodbaths when we left? There were. The biggest was in Cambodia where 1.7 million were killed by the Khmer Rouge. Before the US bombing, they had fewer than five thousand poorly armed guerrillas. Years later, a former Khmer Rouge officer, stated "It was because of their dissatisfaction with the bombing that they kept on co-operating with the Khmer Rouge, joining up, sending their children off." The CIA’s Directorate of Operations, after investigations south of Phnom Penh, reported in May 1973 that the Communists were “using damage caused by B-52 strikes as the main theme of their propaganda.” All told, the US dropped 2,756,941 tons of bombs on Cambodia (slightly smaller than Oklahoma). This is the same amount dropped by the US and Great Britain in the European theatre during all of World War II. Bombing of that magnitude changes a country's history.

The idea that America should have killed another million or two peasants in North Vietnam to prevent a bloodbath is morally indefensible and a mistake. It would not have brought peace or victory, but only more bloodletting. In Vietnam, surging to win (then it was called escalation) was tried again and again for 12 years (1959-70). Each time, the pro-war extremists thought it was the path to victory.

I can't presume to judge who was at fault for getting us into the Vietnam war and who kept us in it. I was a boy, then.
I do know, from studying history, that we made a mistake. A very costly mistake.
I do know we are repeating the same mistake, and I'm not a boy anymore.
STOP THE WAR!
It's our fault, now. Republican or Democrat, it's our fault now.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

???????????????

Thanks and a tip o' the hat to:
Heidi @ VirusHead for the graphic

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Juan Cole on the London car bomb threat: book a flight to London

i just checked in to my hotel in the n.e. part of the state in a smaller town where i will be teaching this evening and tomorrow... while driving over, i stopped a couple of times, once for gas, and the other for coffee... in both places, tv's in the cashier areas were on and tuned to the news which was showing breathless reporters describing the london car bomb threat... i couldn't help but think back to the end of april when an explosive device was discovered outside a women's health clinic in austin, texas, where abortions are performed... THAT story barely made a dent in the national newscasts, although it was at least as big a threat as the discovery in london...

juan cole doesn't seem too thrilled with the london coverage either...

As I write, London police are using a robot to investigate a parked car near Buckingham Palace. The operation comes hours after a car was discovered packed with explosives and ready to detonate outside a nightclub in Picadilly Circus.

The proper response of Americans to these events? Book a vacation in London immediately and make sure to visit Picadilly Circus.

Whoever planned this operation at the height of the tourist season is trying to hurt the UK economy.

Britain is perfectly safe, in fact the murder rate there, including political violence, is one-fourth that of the US. A ticket to the UK can be found inexpensively and there are reasonable places to stay, and as urban historians have pointed out, London is a giant toy that is endless fun to play with.

i've walked all over central london on numerous visits and i hope to be able to do it again soon... if austin, texas, had any attraction for me whatsoever, i would happily walk around there too... i am simply not going to buy in to the fear-mongering that our media so eagerly attempt to shove down our throats...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

True BiPartisan Political Theater?

I know many will see this as an encouraging development, but I am a pessimist regarding our elected officials.
I think that this is political theater to keep us all amused while Congress and the White House continue with business as usual. I am not going to single out the Democrats as the Republicans do, I see it as bipartisan political theater.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong, I really do, but I have no respect for any of the vermin in DC. Full article from the A.P.

Dems call White House out on subpoenas

By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer

Dems call White House out on subpoenas
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats took the first steps Friday in what could be a long march to court in a tug-of-war between the White House and Congress over subpoenas and executive and legislative branch powers.

In a letter to White House counsel Fred Fielding, the heads of the Senate and House Judiciary committees demanded an explanation in 10 days of why the White House claimed executive privilege on subpoenaed documents and vowed to invoke "the full force of law."

The White House - echoing the senior Republican on the Senate panel - urged the chairmen to accept the administration's earlier offer to allow private, off-the-record interviews with current and former aides to President Bush.

"If the committees just want the facts, then they should withdraw the subpoenas and accept the president's offer, instead of this continued pattern of gross overreach and confrontation," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.

Here is the "out" for the Dems. After a lot of fist pounding and rhetoric from both sides, Leahy will cave and allow useless testimony without oaths or transcripts. It will be hailed as a great victory for Congressional over site, but it will be hollow. Democrats can't afford to set the precedent against executive privilege on the eve of their re-occupation of the White House.

[...]
They gave the White House until July 9 to furnish the factual and legal bases for the executive privilege claim and documentation that President Bush personally signed off on it.

Whether or not the White House meets the deadline, "we will take the necessary steps to rule on your privilege claims and appropriately enforce our subpoenas backed by the full force of law," Leahy and Conyers wrote.
[...]
Throughout the nation's history, presidents have repeatedly asserted executive privilege to keep secrets from the courts, the Congress and most anyone else.

Like I said, the Dems. need executive privilege to protect their illegal, unethical rape of the Republic just like Repubs.

Over the years, Congress and the White House have avoided a full-blown court test about the constitutional balance of power and whether the president can refuse demands from Congress.(emphasis added) Lawmakers could vote to cite witnesses for contempt and refer the matter to the local U.S. attorney to bring before a grand jury. Since 1975, 10 senior administration officials have been cited, but the disputes were all resolved before getting to court.
[...]
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., urged a pragmatic response to Fielding's claim of privilege, saying that if the committee accepted the private-interview offer it could always issue subpoenas later.

Arlen, my Senator, is one of the biggest scumbags on Earth. The only time he ever actually opposed the White House was on stem cell research, and he has even backed off of that position.
This statement is, in my opinion, the actual outcome that will be allowed by our treasonous, elitist elected leaders.
Again, I hope I am wrong about all of this, but hope is all I have left.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Beware the July 4th recess (appointments)

the 4th of july congressional recess starts tomorrow...

from the wapo...

There's no constitutional definition of how long a Senate recess must be before the president can make an appointment, and the length has shrunk dramatically in recent years.

"Even a Sunday fishing trip counts as a recess these days," Light joked. "The Senate is losing its authority to confirm presidential appointees through recess," he said, a situation that would have the Framers "spinning in their graves."

what's happening with harry reid's strategy to not have congressional recesses...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dan Froomkin supports Larisa's perspective of a trapped White House

i posted yesterday on larisa's perspective that the white claim of executive privilege on attorneygate has left them without a constitutional argument to thwart the subpoenas for information on domestic spying issued wednesday... it appears that froomkin agrees...

"The doctrine of executive privilege exists, at least in part, to protect such communications from compelled disclosure to Congress, especially where, as here, the president's interests in maintaining confidentiality far outweigh Congress's interests in obtaining deliberative White House communications," [White House Counsel Fred Fielding] wrote.

Making that latter argument in response to yesterday's warrantless wiretapping subpoenas will be vastly harder.

There is no way that yesterday's request can be dismissed as a partisan fishing expedition. The subpoenas were approved by members of both parties. They call for basic information about the legal reasoning behind an important government program that appears to violate federal law. They request information that is necessary for the committee to assess the administration's requests to rewrite the applicable laws. And they properly ask for some explanation of why the president blocked an inquiry by the Justice Department's own ethics office.

For six years, the White House has simply waved off pesky questions from the media and Congress. And it is the wiretapping subpoenas, more even than the U.S. attorney subpoenas, that may bring that period to an end.

let's see what happens...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

So ok, Nancy, are ya gonna support impeachment or not?

you can't go around dropping stuff like this and then continue to keep impeachment off the table...

bob geiger reports on pelosi's conference call with progressive bloggers yesterday...

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) held another one of her regular conference calls with Progressive bloggers on Thursday, addressing topics across the national agenda and emphasizing her commitment to keeping pressure on Republicans to do the right thing on Iraq, bolstering national security and forcing George W. Bush to start obeying America's rule of law.

[...]

"The American people really don't even know the half of it," said Pelosi in discussing what further oversight efforts might ultimately uncover. "In every aspect of the rule of law, and respect for the Constitution and checks and balances and how they conduct themselves, it's impossible to exaggerate how bad they have been."

they're trying to "build the record..." uh, 'scuse me, "build the record" for WHAT, exactly...?

"But we are trying to build the record and that's what we have to do. They had been going for six and a half years with no oversight, just absolutely zero accountability. And when people talk about this Congress, they have to recognize that there's a big distinction between this Congress and previous Congresses in terms of shedding the light of oversight and accountability on this administration. But with many of these things, you have to build a record so the public sees what it is."

what's wrong with this picture...? for starters, not one mention of impeachment, not one mention of contempt of congress, and not one mention of inherent contempt from either pelosi or geiger...

HE-L-L-L-L-OOOOOOO...?!?! THE ALARM CLOCK'S BUZZING...! TIME TO WAKE UP...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday photoblogging: waxing gibbous moon, 98% full, 8:45 p.m. PDT

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Are we that different?

extraordinary... watch it...



(sign the petition here...)

(thanks to agit-pop at the huffpo...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Larisa's take on today's goings-on

golly, i sure hope she's right...

I would like to officially welcome you to Watergate. Please buckle up for the festivities of executive abuses and prepare to watch as Rove, in panic mode, begins to throw people under the bus - who in turn, along with so many other enemies made already, will reveal much more than anyone thought to even look at.

As a chess player, who once had a more than average ranking (if I do say so myself), this was exactly the move that Congress wanted and why it waited until it became undeniably clear that the White House was not remotely interested in protecting the integrity of private council, but rather, protecting its own hide and covering possible crimes. The White House taking this position on attorney-gate is the trap. It is one thing to claim EP [executive privilege] when talking about national security documents, but with attorney-gate, their position has rendered them with no legal or arguably Constitutional leg to stand on.

It would have been far easier to throw Rove and Miers to the curb. Such a move would have been seen as a major effort on the part of the White House to work with Congress. By bringing out the big argument, the only argument, that the White House has in defense of these two - Rove and Miers - they have lost the center of the board - or in non-chess terms, they have lost the advantage and likely, they will lose the game.

Karl Rove, however, will not remain loyal if his own ass is on the line - which it is. Mark my words, protecting Rove and Miers by bringing out the only argument the administration can make (instead of holding it for issues such as the wiretapping program) is not only a bad move, it is a mistake of serious and likely game-ending proportions.

larisa is one of the more astute observers on the scene besides being a crack investigative reporter... i wouldn't dismiss anything she has to say out of hand...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Impeach now or we're going to be even more screwed than we already are

dave lindorff makes the case...

The White House, recognizing the timidity of Congressional Democrats, and its own edge in the courts, has decided to go for broke by challenging Congress to a duel. Certainly the blatant way that Bush has refused to budge on his Iraq War escalation or on Congressional requests for information about issues like the political firing of prosecutors, the warrantless spying on American citizens, or the destruction of improper White House emails, or that Vice President Dick Cheney has refused to provide information of any kind to congressional committees seems designed to taunt Democrats into issuing subpoenas. And the refusal to comply with those subpoenas seems designed to taunt Democrats into declaring the administration in contempt, which puts the issue into court.

Does anyone want to bet on how that will go?

Of all federal court districts, with the exception of Texas, Washington, DC is the most conservative. Larded with Federalist Society judges who believe that the executive branch is supreme, not co-equal with Congress, the odds of the White House’s drawing a judge who will rule in its favor, and of then getting an Appeals Court that will uphold that ruling, are pretty high. And then of course, even if the White House had bad luck, and got an unfavorable lower court ruling, there’s the Supreme Court, which is showing itself to be solidly Federalist.

What this means is that Congress should shift its strategy, and go straight to impeachment.

Why? Because an impeachment hearing is not the same as other Congressional hearings.

Impeachment is a process clearly defined and laid out procedurally in the Constitution. It calls for the House Judiciary to become an Impeachment Committee, giving it a special distinction of being Constitutionally empowered to do its task of investigating presidential or administration wrongdoing. What that means is that a president has no right to claim “executive privilege” or “national security” when asked to provide officials to testify, or to turn over documents.

Of course, the administration could stonewall in the same way it is stonewalling current congressional investigations, but it could not count so readily on the cooperation of ideologically supportive judges this time. Certainly there are political hacks on the federal bench who would vote the president’s way no matter what the issue (Judges Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito come to mind), but I’m not so sure that Chief Justice John Roberts, or even Justice Antonin Scalia fall into that category. To the extent that these and other Federalist Society judicial appointees take their ideology of “original intent” and their role as justices seriously, they would have to find that an impeachment committee demand for testimony or documents trumps such claims as “executive privilege” or “national security.”

The administration would likely lose those battles at every level.

So now Congress has a choice: risk permanently destroying the carefully balanced system of tri-partite government established by the Founding Fathers over two centuries ago by playing the president’s and vice-president’s game of chicken over subpoenas, or change the game and begin impeachment proceedings immediately.

It’s a decision that will have to be made soon.

as we knew all along would happen, bush and his criminal administration have thrown down the gauntlet, and, as lindorff explains, contempt citations with a stacked judiciary are a losing proposition (with the possible exception of inherent contempt)... our elected leaders either act now or they - and each and every citizen of the united states - stands to lose what we have left of our democratic, (formerly) constitutionally-governed republic...

CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS HERE!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A Well Earned Raise?

From the folks who put the CON in Congress.
Our "in touch with the people" Congress voted themselves a pay raise. I just thought everyone would want to join me in giving these decisive, dedicated, hard working, constitution loving professionals a collective cheer.

HEY CONGRESS, YOU REALLY SUCK!

These hard working regular Joes and Joeannas will make, on average, $170,000 per year. That's gross salary before taxes, not including bribes, kickbacks, illegal gifts, and campaign contributions. Hey, it's only about 4 times the average US household income. They need all this money because they get such a terrible Federal benefits package.
I think their congressional motto must be, "When you got'em down, kick'em in the teeth and walk all over them".
Don't worry, the news isn't all bad,.........................., oops, it is all bad.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A sad, sad performance

as josh marshall points out, bush's on-camera performances are hitting new lows... watch his response to the defeat of the immigration bill...



i kept expecting someone to step forward, take his hand, and quietly lead him off the podium to a dark room where he can lie down and think things over in peace and quiet...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Let the constitutional crisis/battle over executive privilege games begin

we knew THESE were coming...

re the subpoenas of harriet miers and sara taylor from fred fielding to conyers and leahy...


[...]


re the subpoenas of white house documents related to the firing of the u.s. attorneys from paul clement to george bush...


[...]


ok, congress, the ball is now in your court...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Gosh, it's just politics as usual as we head in to another election cycle

reading shit like this, authored by the lying, conservative piece of shit, mort kondracke*, one would think that the current situation in the u.s. is just the usual political roller coaster, a few ups and downs, one party gains in disfavor and the other party looks to seize the opportunity to return to power... nothing much, really, just the inevitable speed bumps and give-and-take of american politics...

a few lowlights...

• The political climate definitely favors Democrats winning back the White House and keeping control of Congress in 2008 -- if they don't squander their advantage by ideological overreaching or incompetence.

• The latest Gallup Poll showed that, by 51 percent to 38 percent, voters prefer to see the White House go Democratic and the likeliest Democratic nominees now beat the likeliest Republicans in head-to-head matchups.

• Democrats ought to be able to retain narrow control of the Senate with 22 GOP seats in play against only 12 for Democrats. Perhaps three Democratic Senators are truly vulnerable, while four or more GOP seats are in that category and retirements could produce more.

• Democratic election experts are fairly confident that their party can retain its House majority, currently 16 seats.

• It's true that Congress' approval ratings are dismal -- at 24 percent, according to Gallup, 8 points below President Bush -- and that confidence in Congress as an institution is at 14 percent, a record low.

• Americans are in a foul mood, as befits a country in the midst of an unpopular war.

• [T]he public wants change above all -- and a good opportunity for Democrats to take back the White House unless other factors intervene.

• Unfortunately, many Democrats are still too far to the left. History could not be clearer on the point: Democrats who win at the national level are the ones who are tough on security, fiscally conservative and responsive to people of faith.

• The bottom line -- at least for now -- is that voters want something different from the divisiveness of the Bush era. Democrats have a glorious opportunity to return to power -- if they don't offer up divisiveness as an alternative.

i'm going to go visit daily kos, because i'll bet someone has a diary up on this, taking kondracke to task for statements like "many democrats are still too far to the left," etc., but i'll bet there's almost nobody who takes issue with his broader perspective that we're just riding the see-saw of politics as usual...

mort, mort, mort... it ain't politics as usual... we're in the midst of the most dangerous period in u.s. history and the very foundations of our democratic, constitutionally-based republic are at stake... i keep waiting to hear SOMEBODY - ANYBODY - stepping up to that issue and pointing out that enormous elephant that's trashing our living room and shitting all over the good furniture...

Morton M. Kondracke (born April 28, 1939) is an American political commentator and journalist. He currently serves as executive editor and columnist for the independent Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. He is also co-host of The Beltway Boys on Fox News Channel and a regular nightly contributor on Special Report with Brit Hume.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"Boy, was I wrong," says the dean

note the date - june 28, 2005 - as the moment that david broder, the consummate spokesperson of washington's elite punditry and the unabashed consumer of all the pearls that fall from the mouths of the white house swine, began to let a little light shine in on the fetid swamp that passes for his mind...

[W]hen presidential candidate George W. Bush chose Dick Cheney as his running mate, I applauded the choice... . Boy, was I wrong.

[...]

Bush has allowed Cheney to play a bureaucratic role inside the White House that Cheney never permitted anyone to employ when he was guarding the door as Gerald Ford's chief of staff.

He could exercise this power only with the compliance of the president and only because he often could bypass the procedures he had put in place in the Ford administration, procedures meant to protect the president's interests. He used his intelligence and his grasp on the levers of power -- and most of all he used secrecy -- to outflank and outwit others and thereby shape the Bush administration's agenda.

It was not illegal, and it was not unconstitutional, but it could not have happened unless the president permitted it and enabled it.

remember, i said that it was only a LITTLE light... when he says it "was not illegal, and it was not unconstitutional," i will give broder the benefit of the doubt and assume he's referring to cheney's exercise of power... the remaining light that needs to penetrate his thick skull is that many of the OUTCOMES of that exercise of power are very clearly BOTH illegal AND unconstitutional... ah, well... a step at a time...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The WaPo hits another one out of the park in the World Series of context-free journalism

unfriggingly believable... the sons-of-bitches write a story on bush's appointment of a new U.S. representative to the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference, and then don't even have the good grace to MENTION that bush nominated karen hughes for a virtually identical purpose in march 2005, using almost identical language... and, in the final insult to our intelligence, they don't even BOTHER to reference their own article...

here's the story from today's edition...

President Bush announced plans yesterday to appoint an envoy to an organization of Islamic nations with the intention of improving the battered image of the United States in the Muslim world.

Speaking at the rededication of the half-century-old Islamic Center in Washington, Bush said the new U.S. representative to the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference "will listen to and learn from the representatives from Muslim states and will share with them America's views and values."

"This is an opportunity for Americans to demonstrate to Muslim communities our interest in respectful dialogue and continued friendship," said Bush, who has not yet named anyone to the job.

[...]

The decision to send an envoy to the group comes at a time when the image of the United States is flagging in many corners of the globe and particularly in the Muslim world. A survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project released yesterday found that unfavorable views of the United States outweighed favorable views by lopsided margins in several predominantly Muslim nations that are U.S. allies, including Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, Jordan and Turkey.

but no mention whatsoever of THIS story from the march 12, 2005 edition...

Former White House counselor Karen P. Hughes will take over the Bush administration's troubled public diplomacy effort intended to burnish the U.S. image abroad, particularly in the Muslim world, where anti-Americanism has fueled extremist groups and terrorism, a senior administration official said yesterday.

Hughes, 48, who has been one of President Bush's closest advisers since his tenure as Texas governor, plans to return to Washington soon to rejoin the president's team after a three-year absence and set up shop at the State Department, where she will work with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to reinvigorate the campaign for hearts and minds overseas.

Hughes will take over an operation that has been criticized as lackluster by many analysts and, privately, even by some administration officials, despite its mission of waging a war of ideas against Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda and other Islamic extremist organizations.

[...]

Through exchange programs, foreign language media and other initiatives, the public diplomacy campaign aims to promote American values of democracy, tolerance and pluralism abroad while combating negative images propagated in many parts of the world.

just for giggles and grins, let's compare phraseology...

June 2007
...improving the battered image of the United States in the Muslim world

March 2005
...intended to burnish the U.S. image abroad, particularly in the Muslim world

June 2007
...listen to and learn from the representatives from Muslim states and will share with them America's views and values

March 2005
...promote American values of democracy, tolerance and pluralism abroad

June 2007
...unfavorable views of the United States outweighed favorable views by lopsided margins in several predominantly Muslim nations that are U.S. allies

March 2005
...combating negative images propagated in many parts of the world

June 2007
...our interest in respectful dialogue and continued friendship

March 2005
...reinvigorate the campaign for hearts and minds overseas

something else not mentioned... one month after her senate confirmation in september 2005, here's a review of karen's first trip in her new capacity...

Bush confidante Karen Hughes , the newly appointed, "relentlessly upbeat" Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, has returned from her recent five-day mission to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Marketed as a "listening tour," Hurricane Karen's foray into the volatile region turned into a near feeding frenzy directed at her by the western media, despite the State Department's best efforts to win over the press —which included providing seats to 16 reporters aboard the Under Secretary's Air Force jet.

Hughes's PR failure with her home media would be of little importance if it did not lead to a simple but troubling question: If the administration's Under Secretary in a key foreign policy post can't demonstrate to western reporters that she's a serious professional, how will she ever be able to convince the rest of the world, so doubtful about the Bush administration's intentions and actions, that her official assignment—winning hearts and minds abroad—is worth any attention or respect?

we are truly living in a time-warped, alternate universe...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Lagniappe and Tin-foil Hats

[note: i've bumped brother tim's post up to today because of the important points he raises... prof marcus]

Lagniappe - (lan'-yap) n. Something extra; something not bargained for.

As I read the different Liberal/Progressive Blogs, the word that seems to come up the most is, 'Why?'.

• Why does the MSM sit virtually silent, while this criminal Administration rapes and pillages our Treasury?
• Why does Congress, both House and Senate, sit idly by as our Constitution is being shredded beyond all recognition?
• Why are they all complicit in the machinations of the Bush Administration?
• Why did they pass Bush's Military Commission Act, stripping the right of habeas corpus?
• Why did they pass the Neo-con's Patriot Act? (The name is apropos, as it will be used to arrest and detain true 'Patriots'.)
• Why do they allow kidnappings, secret renditions, secret prisons, and torture? (All in violation of the Constitution or Rule of Law)
• Why do they continue to allow domestic spying and illegal wire-tapping?
• Why do they allow this Administration to flagrantly violate the Constitution and the Rule of Law?
• Why do they talk tough, yet carry a wet noodle?
• Why do they not enforce their Constitutionally mandated powers of oversight, and checks and balances?
• Why do they give Bush anything he wants, and take anything he chooses to give them?
• Why isn't the MSM voicing any outrage over the aforementioned abuses of power?

Why??????

WHY??????

I believe the answer is quite simple, and hidden in plain view. It's a matter of not seeing the forest for the trees.

The answers they all use as sound-bytes and talking points just don't hold water, nor do they stand up to muster. Some of the most frequently heard are:

• The Democrats don't want to be seen as vengeful, or playing partisan politics. (Although we've just witnessed 12 years of Republican control of Congress and six and a half years of this Republican Administration doing exactly that)
• The Republicans don't want to stray too far from the RNC Party Line (read PNAC - Neo-con/Fascists)
• We have to move forward slowly. (Slowly is a relative word, we have to move faster than the perpetrators of this criminal behavior)
• Stoopid bloggers have got their tin-foil hats adjusted too tight.

Lets out tin-foil hat one notch.

Feels better.

Domestic spying and illegal wire-tapping have been going on pre 9-11. The few reports you get, lead you to believe that, even though they claim to target only terrorists, they can also target John Q Citizen.

But John Q Citizen is just 'lagniappe', something extra; something not bargained for. The prime targets may well be the Senators and Representatives; the Corporate Media Heads; or anyone deemed an 'enemy'.

Sounds far-fetched??????

Google 'J Edgar Hoover' if you don't remember how he was able to remain Director of the BOI/FBI for 48 years; the Grim Reaper being the only one that could remove him. Kennedy tried, but, 'No Cigar'.

A conspiracy of this type is not all that difficult to execute, as it feeds on itself as it grows.

Legalities have little or no meaning, because the nature of the information obtained is most likely, illegal as well. Possible prosecution/imprisonment and the loss of assets and career are more than enough to be made to 'play ball', and not cry 'foul'.

An Administration that will treasonously out a covert CIA Operative, will not think twice about taking out a Congressman...........or a Media Head.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"The vice president has run utterly amok and must be stopped"

i am in complete violation of the fair use guideline by printing bruce fein's slate article in full, but it's a must-read...

Bruce Fein is a constitutional and international lawyer with Bruce Fein & Associates and The Lichfield Group. He served as associate deputy attorney general under President Ronald Reagan and was a member of the ABA Task Force on presidential signing statements.

Impeach Cheney
The vice president has run utterly amok and must be stopped.
By Bruce Fein
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 5:06 PM ET

Dick Cheney

Under Dick Cheney, the office of the vice president has been transformed from a tiny acorn into an unprecedented giant oak. In grasping and exercising presidential powers, Cheney has dulled political accountability and concocted theories for evading the law and Constitution that would have embarrassed King George III. The most recent invention we know of is the vice president's insistence that an executive order governing the handling of classified information in the executive branch does not reach his office because he also serves as president of the Senate. In other words, the vice president is a unique legislative-executive creature standing above and beyond the Constitution. The House judiciary committee should commence an impeachment inquiry. As Alexander Hamilton advised in the Federalist Papers, an impeachable offense is a political crime against the nation. Cheney's multiple crimes against the Constitution clearly qualify.

Take the vice president's preposterous theory that his office is outside the executive branch because it also exercises a legislative function. The same can be said of the president, who also exercises a legislative function in signing or vetoing bills passed by Congress. Under Cheney's bizarre reasoning, President Bush is not part of his own administration: The executive branch becomes acephalous. Today Cheney Chief of Staff David Addington refused to renounce that reasoning, instead laughably trying to diminish the importance of the legal question at issue.

The nation's first vice president, John Adams, bemoaned: "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived; and as I can do neither good nor evil, I must be borne away by others and meet common fate." Vice President John Nance Garner, serving under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, lamented: "The vice presidency isn't worth a pitcher of warm piss." In modern times, vice presidents have generally been confined to attending state funerals or to distributing blankets after earthquakes.

---

Then President George W. Bush outsourced the lion's share of his presidency to Vice President Cheney, and Mr. Cheney has made the most of it. Since 9/11, he has proclaimed that all checks and balances and individual liberties are subservient to the president's commander in chief powers in confronting international terrorism. Let's review the record of his abuses and excesses:

The vice president asserted presidential power to create military commissions, which combine the functions of judge, jury, and prosecutor in the trial of war crimes. The Supreme Court rebuked Cheney in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. Mr. Cheney claimed authority to detain American citizens as enemy combatants indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay on the president's say-so alone, a frightening power indistinguishable from King Louis XVI's execrated lettres de cachet that occasioned the storming of the Bastille. The Supreme Court repudiated Cheney in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld.

The vice president initiated kidnappings, secret detentions, and torture in Eastern European prisons of suspected international terrorists. This lawlessness has been answered in Germany and Italy with criminal charges against CIA operatives or agents. The legal precedent set by Cheney would justify a decision by Russian President Vladimir Putin to kidnap American tourists in Paris and to dispatch them to dungeons in Belarus if they were suspected of Chechen sympathies.

The vice president has maintained that the entire world is a battlefield. Accordingly, he contends that military power may be unleashed to kill or capture any American citizen on American soil if suspected of association or affiliation with al-Qaida. Thus, Mr. Cheney could have ordered the military to kill Jose Padilla with rockets, artillery, or otherwise when he landed at O'Hare Airport in Chicago, because of Padilla's then-suspected ties to international terrorism.

Mr. Cheney has championed a presidential power to torture in contravention of federal statutes and treaties.

He has advocated and authored signing statements that declare the president's intent to disregard provisions of bills he has signed into law that he proclaims are unconstitutional, for example, a requirement to obtain a judicial warrant before opening mail or a prohibition on employing military force to fight narco-terrorists in Colombia. The signing statements are tantamount to absolute line-item vetoes that the Supreme Court invalidated in the 1998 case Clinton v. New York.

The vice president engineered the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic surveillance program targeting American citizens on American soil in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. He concocted the alarming theory that the president may flout any law that inhibits the collection of foreign intelligence, including prohibitions on breaking and entering homes, torture, or assassinations. As a reflection of his power in this arena, today the Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Cheney's office, as well as the White House, for documents that relate to the warrantless eavesdropping.

The vice president has orchestrated the invocation of executive privilege to conceal from Congress secret spying programs to gather foreign intelligence, and their legal justifications. He has summoned the privilege to refuse to disclose his consulting of business executives in conjunction with his Energy Task Force, and to frustrate the testimonies of Karl Rove and Harriet Miers regarding the firings of U.S. attorneys.

Cheney scorns freedom of speech and of the press. He urges application of the Espionage Act to prosecute journalists who expose national security abuses, for example, secret prisons in Eastern Europe or the NSA's warrantless surveillance program. He retaliated against Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, through Chief of Staff Scooter Libby, for questioning the administration's evidence of weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq. Mr. Cheney is defending himself from a pending suit brought by Wilson and Plame on the grounds that he is entitled to the absolute immunity of the president established in 1982 by Nixon v. Fitzgerald. (Although this defense contradicts Cheney's claim that he is not part of the executive branch.)

The Constitution does not expressly forbid the president from abandoning his chief powers to the vice president. But President Bush's tacit delegation to Cheney and Cheney's eager acceptance tortures the Constitution's provision for an acting president. The presidency and vice presidency are discrete constitutional offices. The 12^th Amendment provides for their separate elections. The sole constitutionally enumerated function of the vice president is to serve as president of the Senate without a vote except to break ties.

In contrast, Article II enumerates the powers and responsibilities of the president, including the obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. A special presidential oath is prescribed. Section 3 of the 25^th Amendment provides a method for the president to yield his office to the vice president, when "he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office." There is no other constitutional provision for transferring presidential powers to the vice president.

Yet without making a written transmittal to Congress, President Bush has ceded vast domains of his powers to Vice President Cheney by mutual understanding that circumvents the 25^th Amendment. This constitutional provision assures that the public and Congress know who is exercising the powers of the presidency and who should be held responsible for successes or failures. The Bush-Cheney dispensation blurs political accountability by continually hiding the real decision-maker under presidential skirts. The Washington Post has thoroughly documented the vice president's dominance in a four-part series running this week. It is quite a read.

In the end, President Bush regularly is unable to explain or defend the policies of his own administration, and that is because the heavy intellectual labor has been performed in the office of the vice president. Cheney is impeachable for his overweening power and his sneering contempt of the Constitution and the rule of law.

somebody besides paul craig roberts, walter murphy, and the contributors to this blog sees the constitutional crisis that's underway...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Darth "loves the smell of rotting salmon in the morning"

too good to pass up...

That Dick Cheney: He's not exactly John Muir. Not exactly Henry David Thoreau. The final installment of the Gellman/Becker series shows us a man who loves the smell of rotting salmon in the morning.

When he sees a photo of dead fish roasting in the sun, he thinks, "Quick, get me some wasabi."

His Secret Service code name is Angler, because he likes nothing better than to put on his waders and stand in a crystal clear mountain stream with a rod and reel and a few sticks of dynamite.

Gnawin' on a little home-made spotted owl jerky.

Dreamin' of that retirement home with the lovely view of the strip mine.

He'll be there pretty soon: Putterin' around the yard, setting leg traps for coyotes and the neighbor's cats. Always with the canister of DDT in the hip-holster. Clearing brush with the flamethrower and the napalm.

Planning those RV trips to Yucca Mountain.

i'm finding that a little laughter is definitely the order of the day...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"The Cheney doctrine ... Never do in public what you can accomplish by stealth"

my hope is that big-time, big dick, dark darth, fourthbranch has finally managed to get his tit firmly caught in a wringer...

[T]he Cheney doctrine at work: Never willingly provide information, however innocuous. Never do in public what you can accomplish by stealth. And never make a reasonable argument when an outlandish one is at hand.

hope springs eternal...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

WH, Fourthbranch's office, DOJ, and NSC all subpoenaed over domestic spying

i've said before and i'll say again, i don't want to see any more subpoenas issued by congress, subsequently ignored, and then left to hang... this is deadly serious business, and congress had better either get contempt of congress or inherent contempt actions initiated or stop issuing the goddam subpoenas...>

The Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's office Wednesday for documents relating to President Bush's warrant-free eavesdropping program.

Also named in subpoenas signed by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., were the Justice Department and the National Security Council.

The committee wants documents that might shed light on internal squabbles within the administration over the legality of the program, said a congressional official speaking on condition of anonymity because the subpoenas had not been made public.

ferchrissake, let's get this constitutional crisis underway... i plan to be in the crowd outside the white house when marine one takes off with bush for the last time following his resignation...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

No and no

dick morris, one of those perpetual political consultants and talking heads who never seems to be discredited no matter how stupid he comes across, poses two ridiculously easy questions that even the feeble-minded will have no trouble answering...

Will George W. Bush try to steal a page from Richard Nixon and, reading the handwriting on the wall after a dismal showing in the congressional elections, begin to pull troops out of Iraq by the end of the year? If he does, will it save the Republican Party?

oh, puh-l-e-e-e-e-eze... IF - and it's a super-sized, industrial-strength "IF" - ANY troops are withdrawn by the end of the year, if will be a cosmetic gesture only... there is no way in HELL that the u.s. is leaving iraq... no WAY... and to suggest that such a move could save the republican party is so absurd in the extreme, it hardly deserves the energy spent to comment... the ONLY way the republican party can be saved is with a radical makeover, a makeover that would require disavowing george bush, his band of criminals, and the illegal and unconstitutional tenets of the coup d'etat that began with the scotus decision of 12 december 2000... but the proposition that GEORGE BUSH could SAVE the republican party AFTER trashing all this country AND his own party stands for, is patently absurd... but, needless to say, that won't stop dick morris from nattering on...

If Bush decides to act in this way, he will be doing himself, his party, and the country a big favor. There is still time to rescue the fortunes of the Republican Party in the 2008 election. It is Iraq that is dragging the president’s ratings down and killing his party’s chances in the election. Bush’s ratings on the economy are not bad, and he still draws commendations for his battle against terrorism. If he began to pull out troops, he could begin to recover his personal ratings and move his party up.

[...]

In taking the Iraq issue out of contention in the 2008 election, Bush will have rescued his party from what is now almost certain defeat.

[...]

Without Iraq, Bush has quite a record to present to the country in 2008. The economy seems to be avoiding a recession, unemployment remains low, North Korea seems to be caving in, and the Iranian regime seems to be in real trouble at home.

Bush, after all, did relent and fire Donald Rumsfeld — although too late to influence the 2006 election. Maybe he is getting smart enough to extricate himself and his party from the mess in Iraq.

in your dreams, dickie...

dick morris, professional asshole...

Morris is best known for managing Bill Clinton's successful 1996 bid for re-election to the office of President of the United States. His tenure on that campaign was cut short two months before the election, when it was revealed that he had allowed a prostitute, Sherry Rowlands, to listen in on conversations with the President. Morris then turned his focus to media commentary. He now writes a weekly column for the New York Post which is carried nationwide, and he appears regularly on the Fox News Channel for political commentary.

[...]

More recently, Morris has emerged as a harsh critic of the Clintons and has written several books that criticize them, including Rewriting History, a rebuttal to Senator Hillary Clinton's Living History. Morris once joked he will leave the United States if Hillary Clinton were to be elected president in 2008.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Jon Stewart on Fourthbranch

i was going to put up a post on the wapo's 4th installment of the cheney series, but i decided that a little comic relief was in order, and there's nobody who can take down an arrogant, power-mad fool quite like jon stewart...



watch... enjoy... laugh... get some endorphins flowing... god knows, the situation in our country is serious enough...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dear Senator Kerry, - Sincerely, David Addington

i posted on these executive orders the other day (Executive Order 12958 as amended by Executive Order 13292) and kagro x's spot on excerpts, which make no mention whatsoever of treating the president and vice president any differently than "agencies..." imho, addington's way out on a limb on this one...

David Addington, issued a letter to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) today defending the Vice President's interpretation of his office being outside the executive branch - only this time, he said it was because Cheney's office isn't an "agency."

[...]

"Dear Senator Kerry," Addington writes. "The executive order on classified national security information -- Executive Order 12958 as amended in 2003 -- makes clear that the Vice President is treated like the President and distinguishes the two of them from 'agencies.'"

[...]

"The executive order gives the [Information Security Oversight Office], under the supervision of the Archivist of the United States, responsibility to oversee certain activities of 'agencies,' but not of the Vice President or the President."

[...]

Addington insists that the question of whether Cheney is in the executive branch does not apply to the discussion of classified materials.

"Constitutional issues in government are generally best left for discussion when unavoidable disputes arise in a specific context instead of in theoretical discussions," Addington adds. "Given that the executive order treats the Vice President like the President rather than like an "agency," it is not necessary in these circumstances to address the subject of any alternative reasoning, based on the law and the history of the legislative functions of the vice presidency and the more modern functions of the vice presidency, to reach the same conclusions that the vice president is not an 'agency' with respect to which ISOO has a role."

what a gigantic load of steaming, fresh horseshit...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

More on Rove and Alabama

johann, stalwart commenter that he is, bless his heart, is agitating for a stronger connection for rove to the controversy in alabama...

from time magazine's current edition...

Karl Rove, the President's top political strategist, has been implicated in the controversy. A longtime Republican lawyer in Alabama swears she heard a top G.O.P. operative in the state say that Rove "had spoken with the Department of Justice" about "pursuing" Siegelman, with help from two of Alabama's U.S. attorneys.

[...]

The allegation was made by Dana Jill Simpson, a lifelong Republican and lawyer who practices in Alabama. She made the charges in a May 21 affidavit, obtained by TIME, in which she describes a conference call on November 18, 2002, which involved a group of senior aides to Bob Riley, who had just narrowly defeated Siegelman in a bitterly contested election for governor.

[...]

[William Canary, a senior G.O.P. political operative and Riley adviser] reassured others on the conference call — who also included Riley's son, Rob, and Terry Butts, another Riley lawyer and former justice of the Alabama supreme court — that he had the help of a powerful pal in Washington. Canary said "not to worry — that he had already gotten it worked out with Karl and Karl had spoken with the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice was already pursuing Don Siegelman," the Simpson affidavit says.

rove himself last thursday...

When asked about Siegelman's allegations that he was pulling the puppet strings behind the ex-governor's prosecution, Rove smiled and denied it.

"I know nothing about any phone call," Rove said.

Then a White House press aide stepped up and said, "What he meant to say was that he has no comment."

draw your own conclusions... i say, where there's smoke, there's rove...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

John Aravosis calls out the WaPo for burying Lugar's speech yesterday on Iraq

what else would we expect from the wapo...? i'm just surprised they're actually publishing their inflammatory series on cheney and, of course, still wondering why it's taken them so long to put it out there...

here's the pic john posted of wapo's page 3...

The Washington Post, God bless its Iraq-war-loving red soul, buried one of the most important war stories of the day in a little blurb hidden at the bottom of page 3. Namely, that Republican foreign policy expert, Senator Dick Lugar (R-IN), blasted George Bush, the surge, and the overall chances for success in Iraq last night in a long, detailed speech on the floor of the US Senate.

spot on...

and, to further reinforce john's point, here's the wapo email headlines that were waiting in my inbox this morning...

TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS A Strong Push From Backstage 5-4 Supreme Court Weakens Curbs on Pre-Election TV Ads Iraqi Youth Face Lasting Scars of War Court Rules for Cleaners In $54 Million Pants Suit A Guest-Worker Program That Does Well by Migrants More Today's Highlights POLITICS A Strong Push From Backstage 5-4 Supreme Court Weakens Curbs on Pre-Election TV Ads Ex-Aides Break With Bush on 'No Child' GOP Backers Offer Immigration Bill Change NFL Disability Plan Draws Congressional Attention More Politics
NATION World Bank Approves Zoellick NFL Disability Plan Draws Congressional Attention 5-4 Supreme Court Weakens Curbs on Pre-Election TV Ads Court Rules for Cleaners In $54 Million Pants Suit Foreign Nationals Hired For 2 Calif. GOP Posts

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Alabama: the dangerous, third-world country that belongs to Karl Rove

in a current article in harper's, scott horton digs into our 22d state, the "heart of dixie," the stage from which karl rove began his foul career on the american scene and where, as horton so clearly shows, he still calls the shots...

“We have a Justice Department that has substantially been turned into a political arm of the White House,” Bruce Fein told the McClatchy Newspapers earlier this week. He went on to say that the public could have no confidence that federal prosecutions of Democrats by the Justice Department were fair. Mr. Fein is a conservative Republican lawyer and legal scholar of some note–the former senior legal analyst at the Heritage Foundation. As the Deputy Attorney General, he was responsible for the operational management of the Justice Department under President Ronald Reagan. Bruce Fein would not make such a charge lightly. He is speaking from knowledge, not conjecture.

[...]

Sometimes the White House has intervened to shut down or obstruct prosecutions of Republicans...

[...]

And then, still more troubling, there is White House intervention to persecute their political opponents: the telltale sign of tyranny.

[...]

Far, far more troubling still is the conviction of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman in a prosecution in Montgomery.

horton continues with the gory details...

[T]hat the prosecution was corruptly conceived and pursued and that the court proceedings were corrupted, almost from the outset: that is already extremely clear. This is not a prosecution of a political figure for corruption. It is a political vendetta, conceived, developed and pursued for a corrupt purpose.

here's where it REALLY gets interesting...

Dana Jill Simpson, a Republican lawyer who previously worked on a campaign against Siegelman, decided to blow the whistle.

[...]

The response to Simpson’s affidavit has been a series of brusque dismissive statements – all of them unsworn – from others who figured in the discussion and the federal prosecutor in the Siegelman case, who has now made a series of demonstrably false statements concerning the matter. She’s been smeared as “crazy” and as a “disgruntled contract bidder.” And something nastier: after her intention to speak became known, Simpson’s house was burned to the ground, and her car was driven off the road and totaled. Clearly, there are some very powerful people in Alabama who feel threatened. Her case starts to sound like a chapter out of John Grisham’s book The Pelican Brief. However, those who have dismissed Simpson are in for a very rude surprise. Her affidavit stands up on every point, and there is substantial evidence which will corroborate its details.

once again, as shocking as the revelations of house-burning and car-totaling are, nothing surprises me where karl rove is concerned...

there's plenty more in an article that exemplifies investigative journalism at its best, and exposes in glaring and factual details the ruthlessness of the man george w. bush so fondly calls "turd blossom..."

[UPDATE]

johann rightly points out in his comment that i neglected to include the key excerpt that explains why i wrote the post title to focus on karl rove... here 'tis...

The Siegelman prosecution was commenced as the result of a plan hatched between senior figures in the Alabama Republican Party and Karl Rove. This connection is not coincidental, because Rove was once fired by the first President Bush and then had to rehabilitate himself. Rove did this in spades, and the place where he worked his political magic was in Alabama. He put together a campaign to engineer the Alabama GOP’s capture of the state’s judicial machinery. It worked brilliantly. And Rove has retained tight connections with the Alabama GOP ever since. Rove and the Alabama GOP leaders set out to destroy Siegelman’s political career and thus smooth the path by which the Republican Party could secure and retain political control of the Alabama statehouse. It was crafted in such a way as to retard the ability of Democrats to raise money from campaign donors so that they might contest office in Alabama. Each of these purposes is “corrupt.” Key to this plan was the use of the machinery of the Department of Justice for its completion – involving the U.S. attorneys offices in Birmingham and Montgomery, and the Department of Justice in Washington. Rove was in a position to make this work and he did so.

sorry 'bout that...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

It's about THEM not wanting to go to jail

when karl emails his talking points (from his blackberry using his rnc email account), he expects them to be USED...

Note the choice words and phrases used by [Washington Post] columnists, editorial writers, and contributors to describe Fitzgerald's pursuit of Libby:

"train wreck"

"silliness"

"A game"

"overblown"

"Tempest in a teapot"

"sideshow"

"an injustice"

"remarkable for its lack of substance"

"a huge, dangerous waste of time"

"nuts"

"bankrupt"

"farce"

"excessive"

" should not have been conducted in the first place"

"an injustice"

"misguided"

"Fitzgerald's Folly"

I'm nervous Post opinion writers are this close to organizing noisy sidewalk protests on Libby's behalf.

boehlert rightly asks why such fervent support for someone who was convicted on solid evidence and speculates on the answer...

But why? Why has the Post gone all-in on a loser of a case like Libby's? Why the waving of the arms, the name-calling, and the almost comical rhetoric in defense of a relatively straightforward white-collar crime? I think the uproar is more cultural than political (or even legal). It's a class thing. The Washington Establishment, which the Post has dutifully represented for generations, identifies with Libby -- empathizes with him -- and is aghast at the idea that he might have to serve jail time for merely practicing the "dark art of politics," as [Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen] described it.

"...the Post has dutifully represented for generations, identifies with Libby..."

i would push that perspective a bit further... just as that very same media outlet in its current series on cheney described the overt maneuvers in late 2001-early 2002 to write presidential directives in such a way as to minimize the chance of war crimes charges, i think the elite ranks in d.c. - pundits, policy wonks, government officials, lobbyists, and even defense contractors - see the very real possibility of being charged themselves as co-conspirators and accomplices in the clearly illegal and unconstitutional actions of the bush administration... they figure if they can pressure bush to pardon libby, it will set a precedent that would be useful should their own deeds suddenly be subject to accountability...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The troubling specter of candidates courting business leaders

this article, written for fortune magazine and re-printed in cnn money, is looking at which candidate might be friendlier to business interests, and puts the spotlight on hillary clinton who, it says, is making a number of advances to business leaders and who has landed several major endorsements...

why do i find this troubling...? for years and years, our country has pretty much been ruled by business interests, a situation that has been pushed to the extreme in the bush administration... i'm not anti-business, but the enormous contributions businesses and business-related groups can and do make to political candidates dwarf those made by individual citizens... and, given that the campaign universe remains all about money, candidates naturally gravitate to those interests in order to raise enough of it to stand even a chance of being elected, with the perfectly understandable result that, once elected, a politician will feel obligated to return the favor... it's a system that virtually INSURES the common good of the people and the nation as a whole will not receive first, or even second or third, priority...

The more than 150 top executives who have raised money for Clinton represent such brand names as Anheuser-Busch, Comcast, Estée Lauder, Palm, Sun Microsystems and Qualcomm. Venture capitalist James D. Robinson III, the former CEO of American Express and a longtime Republican, told Fortune he now supports Clinton for President, citing her "breadth of experience, especially on the international level, which is critical for going forward."

[...]

Business leaders can provide added heft to a candidate's fundraising efforts - the major candidates are expected to raise a record $1.4 billion in this race - but they also help a candidate's image branding. Democrat John Edwards, who offers sharp-edged populism, is a tougher sell to business. But Clinton and Obama view CEO support as a key part of their crossover appeal.

A roster of business endorsements "says to voters that you'll be strong on the economy," says Clinton campaign chair Terry McAuliffe. Most of the top-tier candidates - Republican and Democrat - have made pilgrimages to the Business Roundtable's offices in Washington to pitch some 60 CEOs at a time.

i think it's important to know who is giving how much and to whom... while hillary's list of backers represents a laundry list of some of the country's most rich and powerful, rudy giuliani's list is positively frightening...

Giuliani's Wall Street support isn't as broad as that of fellow New Yorker Clinton, but he has culled important business support in Texas and elsewhere. Billionaire hedge fund manager T. Boone Pickens has raised nearly $1 million for the candidate. "In New York he cleaned up the city, ran Mafia convictions, then [handled] 9/11," Pickens says. Giuliani also has the support of Texas Rangers owner Tom Hicks, billionaire investor Sid Bass, and superstar activist Carl Icahn.

pickens, bass, and icahn are some of the most predatory, devious, unscrupulous, capitalist plunderers on the planet, and their endorsement of giuliani tells me more about giuliani than i ever wanted to know...

as much as i try to avoid reading the business press, it pays - pardon the pun - to stay informed, particularly in this, among the most crucial presidential election seasons in the history of the united states...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dana Milbank on Fourthbranch: "Madison and Franklin did not return phone calls yesterday"

with somebody this over the top and this bizarre, and someone who also seems to have been running our country for the past 6 1/2 years, it helps to have a sense of humor...

dana milbank from today's wapo...

The Cheese Stands Alone

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page A02

[...]

"The vice president's theory seems to be one almost laughable on its face, that he's not part of the executive branch," Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) said in a conference call with reporters from his car. "I think if you ask James Madison or Benjamin Franklin or any of the writers of the Constitution, they'd almost laugh if they heard that."

Madison and Franklin did not return phone calls yesterday.

and, after being attacked by the press wolf pack yesterday (entirely justified, imho), i don't imagine dana perino is going to willingly throw herself back into action again any time soon... or, if she finds herself in front of the gaggle again today, maybe she can just sing them a song...

The farmer in the dell

The farmer in the dell
The farmer in the dell
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The farmer in the dell

The farmer takes a wife
The farmer takes a wife
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The farmer takes a wife

The wife takes a child
The wife takes a child
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The wife takes a child

The child takes a nurse
The child takes a nurse
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The child takes a nurse

The nurse takes a cow
The nurse takes a cow
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The nurse takes a cow

The cow takes a dog
The cow takes a dog
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cow takes a dog

The dog takes a cat
The dog takes a cat
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The dog takes a cat

The cat takes a rat
The cat takes a rat
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cat takes a rat

The rat takes the cheese
The rat takes the cheese
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The rat takes the cheese

The cheese stands alone
The cheese stands alone
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cheese stands alone

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Cheney, Part 3, is up now at the WaPo

what it describes, in a nutshell, is a president of the united states, NOT a vice president of the united states, going about the duty of shaping domestic, budgetary, tax, and economic policy... in the scenario painted by becker and gellman, george w. bush is a bit player...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Arrest warrants issued for CIA agents in Germany - another government responsive to its citizens

.


A CIA jet takes off at Palma de Mallorca

i've posted twice since february (here and here) on the trial that began on june 8 in italy for the 26 cia agents accused in the extraordinary rendition of abu omar...

[A] Milan court opened the trial of a group of CIA agents accused of kidnapping a radical Egyptian cleric — the first legal prosecution of one of the administration's most controversial counter-terrorism tactics.

Twenty-six American defendants, including two CIA station chiefs and an Air Force colonel, are being tried in absentia in the 2003 abduction from a Milan sidewalk of the cleric known as Abu Omar.

you might remember that the opening of the trial in milan coincided with bush's recent visit to that country...

In an uncomfortable coincidence for American officials that highlighted the ongoing strain in U.S.-Italian relations, the trial started just hours before Bush arrived in Italy for a day-and-a-half visit following the Group of 8 summit in Germany.

now, germany's gotten in the act, issuing arrest warrants for the cia agents suspected of kidnapping Khaled el-Masri, a Lebanese-born German citizen, in Macedonia in January 2004, which i posted about this past march...

from der spiegel online...

The district attorney's office in Munich has filed international warrants with Interpol for the arrest of Lyle L., 51, and nine other CIA employees. Lyle L., also known as "Uncle Bud," a former member of the elite Green Berets combat unit, is alleged to have been part of a group of agents who kidnapped Khaled el-Masri, a Lebanese-born German citizen, in Macedonia in January 2004 and flew him to Afghanistan via the Mediterranean island of Mallorca. A trained medic, Lyle L. was probably the one who administered sedatives to Masri on board the Boeing 737.

and, as you would expect from the germans, they're dead serious...

Officials in Washington have since realized that the German investigation is more than just a symbolic act. This week in Berlin, a group of senior officials from the interior, foreign and justice ministries will meet to discuss the sensitive issue of how the German government should handle the Munich petition for "arrest for the purposes of extradition." There is general agreement within the government in Berlin that the request should be promptly delivered to the Bush administration, which would be tantamount to an official request for the arrest of the men being sought.

meanwhile, official washington is whining...

At a recent lunch in the German Embassy in Washington, Michael Hayden, the new CIA director, complained about the "bottomless criticism" from Europe that the US government faces for abducting suspicious Islamists. One US diplomat calls Germany's approach the "German double standard."

as spiegel notes, germany could have stopped the issuance of the warrants, but they didn't because, unlike our government here in the u.s., they were concerned about the resulting public outcry...

The German government could have put a stop to the arrest warrants in the first stage. It would simply have had to refer to Paragraph 153c of the German Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that a legal proceeding can be terminated by official decree if this is in the "prevailing public interest." But a group of senior officials meeting at the Justice Ministry rejected a government veto, arguing that any government efforts to apply the brakes on the investigation would be too difficult for the public to swallow.

imagine that...! a government responsive to its citizens...! that makes two countries in one week... (see story about mexico's supreme court defending that country's constitution here...) what's the world coming to...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments